Sheesh! From the headline you'd think it was Dresden.

Yikes - and here I thought "Shock and Awe" was back!

"slowdown" == "depression" too.

Devastating != massive... at least, not necessarily.

It is "massive" in the sense that the projectiles were not quark or strange matter munitions but contained a measurable mass of explosives. Come on, you Rightwing nuts know what we're talking about here!

The whole coverage of the Basra fight has been a disgrace. Newspapers have basically delared a consensus victory for Sadr based on... feelings, I guess. I'm surprised you haven't covered it more, CY. Does anybody have any idea how many casualties the Iraqi govt took? I just want to know, one way or the other.

I'm surprised you haven't covered it more, CY.

Frankly,I haven't covered it because my access to sources in that that part of the country is extremely limited and so much of the reporting being done is contradictory.

The Iraqi government forces, the best I can tell based upon anecdotal evidence, took low casualties during the operations in Basra, Kut, Baghdad, etc. I've seen no firm numbers, but I would estimate far less than 100 KIA, perhaps half that. The Sadrists got their clocks cleaned, with estimates of over 400 KIA , twice that wounded, and more than 100 captured, with more on the run.

Based on casualty numbers, it appears to be a clearcut victory for GOI forces, even though it remains in doubt if the mission's objectives were filled. The Sadrists seem to have won the media, but standards were low for them. All they had to do was avoid being utterly wiped out.

If you want to know who won in the eyes of the Iraqis, go to the yahoo.com news photo streams for Iraq, and note the huge crowds of men in southern cities such as Basra flocking to join the Iraqi Army.

How often do people voluntarily join an army they expect to lose?

Yeah, I saw that. This whole thing, IMO, is the most blatant con-job by the MSM to date. It's as if the correspondents were leapfrogging each other to get their Cronkite moment. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Remember ya'll. We won every battle in Vietnam and lost the war here in America. If they tell lies often enough without challenge, it will become accepted as truth. And just kickin' their asses don't work. You have to fight lies with TRUTH.

The operations in Basra have not been won or lost yet, they are ongoing. The brief Sadr uprising in response has been soundly put down with massive special group casualties and a call by sadr for his people to stop fighting.

How often do people voluntarily join an army they expect to lose?

I blame the Democrats. If we were more irrationally exuberant we'd have a flood of able-bodied, bright, young conservatives like CY or any of the board posters here who would be more than willing to enlist. Sadly, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have scared off the wingnut hordes with their talk of "the new GI Bill", "investigating the VA", and "insisting on troop deployment rates that follow recommended Army guidelines". How many of you would be over there right now if you didn't think your right to fight for 15 consecutive months would be infringed upon. Really, this is all about the military-funded government sponsored medical coverage. If we just gave all our soldiers Blue Cross / Blue Shield or Aetna, people would be lining up around the block to join up.

Of course, if John McCain takes the White House, he'll change all of that. I bet you recruitment will skyrocket if he takes office. Nothing restores confidence in a military invasion like the promise of 100 more years on the ground.

Hey, zifnab, care to explain why that statement was relevant? Also, speaking of 100 year occupations, are the Democrats going to end this pointless war against Japan? After all, we have had trops there since 1945, and we are no closer to winning than when we started....

Hey, zifnab, care to explain why that statement was relevant?

Just that we all know where CY is leading with this bemoaning of the death of troop morale. It's yet another verse in the song that never ends entitled, "It's the Democrats' Fault". CY has been very... liberal... in expressing his opinion on that front.

Also, speaking of 100 year occupations, are the Democrats going to end this pointless war against Japan? After all, we have had trops there since 1945, and we are no closer to winning than when we started....

That's an excellent question. We could just as easily ask the last 5 Republican Presidents as we could ask the last 4 Democrats. And I'm in total agreement with you. Military bases in Japan are a giant waste of resources if you're not looking to build a global empire. Fortunately, America's been in Empire Building Mode since about 1945. Of course, we don't lose 30 soldiers a month fighting it out on the mean streets of Tokyo either. We also don't hemorrhage $12 billion / month in upkeep costs. So comparing Japan to Iraq is rather ignorant.

If McCain were to announce we should spend the next 100 years in Japan, I think he'd still raise some eyebrows. He'd be resurrecting a point of contention that died with the Ron Paul campaign. Why do we have this global military network of bases? We're spending a fortune in tax payer dollars to protect ourselves from a military that's been little more than a police force for the last half a century. Why do we keep military bases in the Philippines or in Germany or in Saudi Arabia, for that matter? But that talk strays perilously close to a discussion on "national security" which immediately invokes the GOP bugbears of creeping global communism and the trans-continental terrorist menace.

It's a discussion Republicans haven't been interested in having seriously since Nixon. Much better to just throw slurs - hippie, commie, terror-lover - at your political opponents than to engage in a rational discussion of what global military presence America actually requires.

Though the weapons used where J-DAMs, I think we would all agree that two MOABS would be a massive airstrike.

No one blamed the Dems but you Zinfab. You make a strong case though. Count me convinced.

Zifnab,
McCain's comment about 100 more years was in reference to Japan and Germany, something he made quite explicit in his speech. That was my point. He was saying that if things go right, we might very well have troops stationed there for a very long time indeed, not that we would still be fighting there.

As for "empire building," we can either play global policemen (because nobody else can), or we can let the rest of the world (Sudan, the Balkans, Kuwait, Taiwan, etc.) shift for itself. Do you really want to do that?

I suspect the reason why conservatives don't try to reason with you is because you don't come across are particularly rational. Your first post is a case in point - even with an explanation it doesn't make any sense.

Zifnab, I am sure you can provide links to the post where CY said he blamed the Democrats.

Oh, and as for commenters going down to their local recruiting office, as I have pointed out twice recently, I am disabled and cannot join. You have, therefore, proven that you either can't or don't read or comprehend well, and in the process have made yourself look like a durned fool.

Congratulations.

Of course, we don't lose 30 soldiers a month fighting it out on the mean streets of Tokyo either. We also don't hemorrhage $12 billion / month in upkeep costs. So comparing Japan to Iraq is rather ignorant.

Of course, we never lost hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq. That they're not exactly the same doesn't preclude drawing parallels, and suggesting otherwise is utterly ignorant.

We haven't even lost as many soldiers in Iraq as we lost in one single battle on the way to Japan... I speak, of course, of Iwo Jima.

Shall we continue with the comparisons? I think we shall.

Our efforts in Japan have helped make them a stabilizing force in Asia, one of our staunchest allies, one of the largest and most vibrant economies in the world, and one of the freest societies as well. If we can do that in Japan, why can't we do something similar in Iraq?

You sure you wanted to compare Japan and Iraq, Zifnab?